please_dont [he/him]

Being a willing commander ,and too a lesser extend grunt ,on a genocidal and enslavement against an entire race of people war of aggression 2000 miles from home while civilian holocaust of tens of millions of people is happening around you perpetrated by 95% of your brothers in arms makes you indeed permanently stained and unclean. You dont have to rape women or execute every civilian you see.

There where shades on a slider but even in the outmost edges of it there certainly werent “clean” whermacht soldiers and commanders “with moral backbones”. Shades still started with almost black into pitch ,zero photon reflecting, black

Like Alaskaball pointed out extreme background checks on all US soldiers, draft or not, seeing the actively participated in war crimes and crimes against humanity in any and all of the past and present US wars and punishment accordingly should be the way. For the rest radicalization/re-education till they can recognize the error of their involvement and then actively being comrades is a good line to draw

This is better executed the closer to us the conflict is. For lets say Vietnam we cant do any such thing at this point but when talking active boots on the ground we do know that a a big chunk, likely a majority was involved in crimes against humanity and war crimes one way or another. And we do know that the vast vast vast majority doesnt regret em or has reconsidered and is proud , hell a big majority % of em voted for Trump and supported every subsequent war. So in this sense treating Vietnam vets as you would have treated nazi soldiers will have you be correct more than often than not

I had saved most of this from a user long ago but thi is the general syrian conflict and situation regarding Rojava-US-Assad-Turkey-Islamists

• young, secular, middle-class students form a spontaneous anti-Assad “pro-democracy” movement in the upswell of discontent that was the Arab Spring

• They are almost immediately given massive coverage by Western media, and even approached by Westerners giving them advice on how to conduct their protests (ie the elaborate apparatus goading and trianing color revolutionaries that has existed since the late 80s)

• A disparate network of American and British ex-spooks rapidly organizes a elaborate propaganda apparatus designed to propagandize for all anti-Assad groups and activity

• The destabilization of the Assad government triggered by the Arab Spring protests in turn triggers a massive upswell in hyper-sectarian Sunni fundamentalism that dwarfs the original protesters, which organize into murderous sectarian militias to conduct pogroms against non-believers

• The Assad government rapidly loses control of the situation and its authority effectively disintegrates in most parts of the country. The original middle-class secular student protesters realize what is happening and back the government.

• The United States, its propaganda apparatus now continuing to portray these radical fundamentalist militias as “moderate rebels”, begins flooding arms to these various sectarian Sunni fundamentalist groups. These guys are all fighting each other as well as the Assad government, not merely for sectarian reasons but because they are various proxies for rival US-allied Sunni states - Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia - jockeying for influence in the presumed successor government

• The most effective anti-Assad fighters by a considerable margin are al-Qaeda affiliates like the al-Nusra Front/Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and Islamic State, the latter of which rapidly gains influence between 2013-2014 in the vacuum left by the Assad government’s disintegration of authority due to being experienced in fighting insurgencies and being highly organized before the conflict even started (due to having its origins in the anti-US insurgency in Iraq). Despite the US explicitly telling the proxies they’re arming not to give these weapons to groups like al-Nusra, because those people are literally the most effective fighters this inevitably happens anyways.

• Islamic State spills across the border into Iraq in 2014. The completely unreliable Iraqi military basically disintegrates before them. Only desperate action, IS overextension, and extensive American intervention prevent the Iraqi government from collapsing.

• Russia begins intervening extensively to protect their ally , as they have been fed up with the Americans since at least 2008 and are now acting accordingly to roll back or resist American encirclement

• The US begins backing the Kurds against both Assad and Islamic State, in both northeastern Syria and northern Iraq, against the wishes of their Turkish allies. The Kurds turn out to be more reliable proxies. Their initial plan is to split off northeastern Syria from the Assad government and form a Kurdish state chiefly in order to deny Assad control of oil resources in the region. This is obviously contradictory with the US’s firm commitment to the Turks as a member of NATO.

• Pretty much all players in the conflict unite against Islamic State. They are essentially defeated by 2018. The Assad government and Kurdish SDF are the biggest beneficiaries. By now the tide has turned decisively against the rebels and in favor of the Assad government. At some point (2016?) the rebel forces in southern Syria become pinned in and a massively “humanitarian” evacuation campaign led by the US and Israel either gets them out of the country or dumped into a stronghold around the city of Idlib in Northerwestern Syria. Additionally in late 2017 the recovered Iraq government moves to crush the autonomous Kurdish Regional Government by force to put down any hint of separatism and uniting with Syrian Rojava as a Kurdish state. This pretty much scuppers any US plan to partition off Rojava into a Kurdish state, but they keep the Kurds in limbo about this, deliberately telling them to stonewall negotiations from Assad, for like two years.

• Turkey, which has been heavily supporting the Sunni fundamentalist rebel groups throughout the war, intervenes directly by invading the SDF’s enclave in Afrin in early 2018. This is due to long-running concerns about the Kurdish communist-nationalist-separatists that have plagued the country for decades, and them potentially becoming emboldened and strengthened through cross-border cooperation.

• In 2019, the Turks invade Rojava, intending to secure a “buffer zone” all along the border where they can expel the Kurds and resettle the region with their Sunni jihadist proxies. Rojava, who again have been discouraged from negotiating with Assad by the US for years, are cut loose and thrown to the (grey) wolves. In desperation, they cut a deal with Assad where they will presumably be able to negotiate regional autonomy after the war is over. The SAA takes positions with the SDF in northeastern Syria and effectively halts the Turkish-jihadist advance

• In very late 2019 the SAA begins a renewed offensive against the Idlib Pocket. They are rolling them back rapidly and it seems an end to the war is in sight. Then a (probably Russian) air strike kills like 60 Turkish special forces “advisers” near Idlib. This causes the Turks to again escalate their intervention and they inflict severe losses on the SAA, halting their advance.

• With decreased US occupation of the erea the Kurds were forced to strike ,a hopefully long lasting now, deal with the Syrian state and governent to avoid getting completely genocided by the Turks and continue with some very limited regional autonomy since the Syrian state . They neither got genocided nor assimilated Rojava since that would mean again exasterbating the situation into an utterly chaotic and violent civil war, becoming even weaker against the islamic oposition groups and destroying their country. The thing Kurds lost and would lose is a big degree of regional autonomy that in many ways never had cause they never could say no to any of the US requests and decisions about what will happen in their erea

And on the opposite side, US presence has and had the goal of Assad being defeated by the US-led coalition which would not lead to a better outcome for the Syrian or Kurdish peoples based on the primary opposition inside syria.In this sequence of events there is effectively no scenario where the secular Syrian Government can become stable economicaly and geopoliticaly with US prolonging their occupation in the erea since its very presence and action there is for it to not happen. Prollonging the current situation of even a decreeased US presence in the erea (which can always and probably will be attempted to ramp up) means misery and suffering for millions of syrian citizens with no future where they will have a full belly and a safe ans stable life. You pretty much have three scenarios for that case :

• Islamic foundementalists win. This probably triggers a direct and large-scale intervention by the United States, which will mean prolonged war and insurgency for decades.

• The Assad government collapses entirely, without Islamic State as the primary beneficiary. Syria essentially turns into a Libya-style anarchy except worse, as the jihadist proxies for various actors in the region begin conducting sectarian pogroms with no resistance and fighting each other for their share of the ashes. Eventually one faction will win out and impose a Sunni fundamentalist regime that is a puppet for either Turkey, Qatar, or Saudi Arabia.

• The same as Scenario 2 except the SDF carves out an independent Kurdish state in northeastern Syria in the process. Then 1.Turkey invades and crushes them, then either annexes the region outright or eventually hands it off to a puppet government they help set up in Damascus. 2. The US completes morphs that erea into a semi-vassal state under the guise of “protecting the second only democracy in the middle east” with continued pressence for influencing anything military or geopolitical in the erea strengthening their position against Iran and rival forces. The Kurds can never exist without the US and can never say no to anything the US decides to do in and from their erea since again any US pulling back would mean Turkey /and or the worse than Assad power that controls syria now invading them

So all that considered i always had an issue with supporting them as a project existing under and only through US presence . Mostly against the mainstream in the left narrative that it HAD TO and that there WAS NO CHOICE and THAT ASSAD AND TURKS WOULD SLAUGHTER THEM OTHERWISE and so US presence is the lesser evil for them.Which like we laid out is not the case. The Americans are the greatest opressors in the erea by an insane degree, and anything else that comes close (isis) is basicaly a result of their presence and interference. People that became downtrodden by the american empire and resist against its opressive presence and occupation are both the majority comperatively to the Kurds and the group that takes precedent regarding my supporth (as long as they arent straight up islamic foundementalists) and supporting them means the complete removal of US from the region means that Rojava as a project will just lose its percieved “autonomy” and be set back massively.

So im happy to support the form it takes without US presence even if it is less politicaly and economicaly “autonomous” ,its better for everyone in the long run

Like, yeah they’re a lesser threat to the world at large than the US, but it’s hard to blame Rojava for choosing to accept the military protection of the US rather than fully throwing themselves on the mercy of Ba’athist Syria

They are a lesser threat on Syria and even the Kurds specificaly than Assad. You can go as local as you want in the middle east and the US still is the greater Evil. More people died and suffered, die and suffer due to US presence and involvement in Syria than they would have other wise than the entire population of Rojava X5 , for sure more than shitty ass Assad regime did. They didnt just accept military protection , they gave the US free pass to do what they please from maybe the most strategic important erea of Syria and operate and occupy as they like.And they did act as they like from within rojava and that did extend their presence and ability to project power and destabilize the region further. They could never say no to the US so it was never a case of them "gettinga autonomy " from dealing with the US. Their choice was at the expense of tens of millions of Syrians and middle eastern people and in the end of the day at the expense of themselves. A Syria without US presence and involvement and a Kurdish people not in the whim of the US military wouldnt result in Turkey nearly genociding them within Syria’s boarders. Its something that would never be allowed to happen if not in a Syria thrown into shambles by western intervention, fractured and weakened and if not the US didnt take what it want from the Kurds and leave them to die. It was the Syrian state that did the obvious thing and pushed jumped in without in the end of the day even destroying Kurdish autonomy or Anexing them. You can go into “well these sneaky!! they would genocide the Kurds as well if they had the chance” but its obvious at this point (and rojava accepted it) and it was obvious at all previous points in the last 10 years that a reduced autonomy allience with Assad would be both the best for the entire erea and people and in the long run would be for the Kurds in general.

During the Cuban revolution and shortly afterwards they killed or exiled like 98% of people that had positions of the Batista state or supported it or benifited from it and didnt defect, from the local to the highest level. I dont know how is that a counter example or how you reply to “we should purge reactionaries that would take action to harm us during and after the revolution” with “well thats how we got pol pot”. Well yeah among a dozen other reasons i guess. But thats also how we got any project that survived more than a couple of years and was able to become stable anough and overcome the opposing forces domesticaly and worldwide to a big enough degree that it could afford the humanist apporach and turned away from any mass repression, like with Cuba

“Xi does think he’s moving to a new kind of system that doesn’t exist anywhere in the world,” said Barry Naughton, a China economy expert at the University of California, San Diego. “I call it a government-steered economy.”

Xi, Deng etc:

-“We are communists. Here are our openly stated long term socialist goals and the marxist reasoning and analysis for the choices and policies that have been enacted in the last 40 years. Here are tens of thousands of pages repeating in the most simple terms that Capital isnt in charge of China and that reform and oppening up is and was a means and not a trend towrads complete capitalist restoration. Its the only and most successfull means (for the conditions of China) towards building what we judged as necessary material, geopolitical and technological base and requirements to move beyond it and towards a socialist and secure from outside forces future. It isnt nearly done yet but we have progressed enough that we can start pulling back on some stuff and reign on capital power and corruption”

“Western expert on Chinese economy” when Xi takes actions completely in line with those plans that rhetoric , ideology and analysis:

-"OMG this is a totally new system dictator Xi’s is building towards . Who could have seen it coming really?. I CALL IT -random words sticked together instead of basic material and marxist analysis-